Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 6)

[Diderot]

Randy Winkman said:

Lots of good climate change TV tonight.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010yl3

I look forward to the discussion on it tomorrow.

Though I appreciate that Turbobloke wont be able to take participate since it's on the BBC.

It’s because of the ‘unique way’ the BBC is funded apparently.

I predict/project there will be more of the same indigestible fare from those that have vested interests/axes to grind/pension funds reliant on this BS/ activism to perpetrate etc on the run up to the biggest crime against the climate since, well the last (no) COP.

Imagine 25k delegates needlessly flying in from all over the planet, a planet which of course, according to tthe very same people, faces an existential threat from normal people flying around the globe needlessly, and is, in an emergency right now with no respite from normal people flying and polluting and driving and wasting precious resources. Has no one informed the hypocrites of their gross hypocrisy? Of course, we must remember that their hypocrisy is vastly more important than the people that subsidise their crimes against the planet.

[Diderot]

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

[dickymint]

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

His point was to ignore the hiatus

[Randy Winkman]

Diderot said:

Randy Winkman said:

Lots of good climate change TV tonight.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010yl3

I look forward to the discussion on it tomorrow.

Though I appreciate that Turbobloke wont be able to take participate since it's on the BBC.

It’s because of the ‘unique way’ the BBC is funded apparently.

I predict/project there will be more of the same indigestible fare from those that have vested interests/axes to grind/pension funds reliant on this BS/ activism to perpetrate etc on the run up to the biggest crime against the climate since, well the last (no) COP.

Imagine 25k delegates needlessly flying in from all over the planet, a planet which of course, according to tthe very same people, faces an existential threat from normal people flying around the globe needlessly, and is, in an emergency right now with no respite from normal people flying and polluting and driving and wasting precious resources. Has no one informed the hypocrites of their gross hypocrisy? Of course, we must remember that their hypocrisy is vastly more important than the people that subsidise their crimes against the planet.

I agree that they are hypocritical.

[Diderot]

Randy Winkman said:

Diderot said:

Randy Winkman said:

Lots of good climate change TV tonight.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010yl3

I look forward to the discussion on it tomorrow.

Though I appreciate that Turbobloke wont be able to take participate since it's on the BBC.

It’s because of the ‘unique way’ the BBC is funded apparently.

I predict/project there will be more of the same indigestible fare from those that have vested interests/axes to grind/pension funds reliant on this BS/ activism to perpetrate etc on the run up to the biggest crime against the climate since, well the last (no) COP.

Imagine 25k delegates needlessly flying in from all over the planet, a planet which of course, according to tthe very same people, faces an existential threat from normal people flying around the globe needlessly, and is, in an emergency right now with no respite from normal people flying and polluting and driving and wasting precious resources. Has no one informed the hypocrites of their gross hypocrisy? Of course, we must remember that their hypocrisy is vastly more important than the people that subsidise their crimes against the planet.

I agree that they are hypocritical.

So what is one to do about it?

[Randy Winkman]

Diderot said:

Randy Winkman said:

Diderot said:

Randy Winkman said:

Lots of good climate change TV tonight.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010yl3

I look forward to the discussion on it tomorrow.

Though I appreciate that Turbobloke wont be able to take participate since it's on the BBC.

It’s because of the ‘unique way’ the BBC is funded apparently.

I predict/project there will be more of the same indigestible fare from those that have vested interests/axes to grind/pension funds reliant on this BS/ activism to perpetrate etc on the run up to the biggest crime against the climate since, well the last (no) COP.

Imagine 25k delegates needlessly flying in from all over the planet, a planet which of course, according to tthe very same people, faces an existential threat from normal people flying around the globe needlessly, and is, in an emergency right now with no respite from normal people flying and polluting and driving and wasting precious resources. Has no one informed the hypocrites of their gross hypocrisy? Of course, we must remember that their hypocrisy is vastly more important than the people that subsidise their crimes against the planet.

I agree that they are hypocritical.

So what is one to do about it?

Perhaps vote for The Green Party who would hopefully take it all more seriously?

[kerplunk]

turbobloke said:

The many cooling predictions posted on PH are in fact three, one from Dr T Landscheidt (ref 2030) another from Dr H Abdusamatov (ref 2050 in keeping with a solar Dalton Min projection) not forgetting Dr D Archibald (also 2030 iirc). It looks like you're suffering from a convenient form of premature adjudication. Unlike so many tens of dire agw predictions suffering from serial failure, they won't be kicked into the future.

It's getting chilly as winter approaches , keep warm while you panic.

It looks like you're suffering from a convenient form of memory loss.

Who said the predictions had to be posted on PH? And you're under-counting even on those terms - Svensmark? Easterbrook?

They won't be kicked into the future eh

turbobloke said:

one from Dr T Landscheidt (ref 2030)

A previous one from Landscheidt from 1981:

"Characteristically, the last great advance of Alpine glaciers, though not as prolonged as during grand minima, occurred in the decades after 1810 (Rudloff, 1967). It is to be expected that the climatic conditions in at least three decades after 1990 will be more severe than after 1811" http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/swinging.htm

In 2000 Landscheidt published another paper that reads like an apology for the fact that cooling hadn't showed up yet and instead warming was observed:

"Geomagnetic activity leads temperature by 4 to 8 years. Allowing for this temperature lag, an outstanding aa peak around 1990 could explain the high global temperature in 1998. After 1990 the geomagnetic aa data show a steep decline comparable to the decrease between 1955 and 1967, followed by falling temperatures from 1961 through 1973 in spite of growing anthropogenic CO2 emissions. This points to decreasing global temperature during the next 10 years"

http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/solarwind.htm
I
Has there been a little ice age 'update' since?

Oh yes here it is from 2003:

New Little Ice Age Instead of Global Warming? http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/new-e.htm

"We need not wait until 2030 to see whether the forecast of the next deep Gleissberg minimum is correct. A declining trend in solar activity and global temperature should become manifest long before the deepest point in the development."

Solar activity has indeed declined so half right, but temps have gone the other way. With just 9 years to go until 'the deepest point' I'm happy to call that one a dead duck too.

turbobloke said:

another from Dr H Abdusamatov (ref 2050 in keeping with a solar Dalton Min projection)

Again you cite the deepest point but Abdusamatov predicted (in 2012) cooling would commence in 2014:

"The Earth as a planet will henceforward have negative balance in the energy budget which will result in the temperature drop in approximately 2014".

turbobloke said:

not forgetting Dr D Archibald (also 2030 iirc)

No you don't recall correctly. From Archibald 2006:

"Projections of weak solar maxima for solar cycles 24 and 25 are correlated with the terrestrial climate response to solar cycles over the last three hundred years, derived from a review of the literature. Based on solar maxima of approximately 50 for solar cycles 24 and 25, a global temperature decline of 1.5°C is predicted to 2020, equating to the experience of the Dalton Minimum."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1260/09583...

Strange you don't recall that one correctly seeing as your words from 2008 have been quoted frequently (and as recently as last week):

turbobloke said:

Archibald's original submission as featured on HM Treasury website, with cooling of 1.5 deg Celsius by 2020, has the right timescale and about the right temperature change.

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=141&t=519327&i=80

more cycle-based prediction fails here:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/a-look-bac...

Edited by kerplunk on Monday 18th October 22:55

Edited by kerplunk on Monday 18th October 23:28

[Diderot]

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

His point was to ignore the hiatus

Ah you mean that second, more recent, hiatus?

[kerplunk]

Diderot said:

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

His point was to ignore the hiatus

Ah you mean that second, more recent, hiatus?

Ah pause V2.0 - good luck with that

Would you care for a wager? Howabout the 2020s will be warmer than the 2010s?

[Diderot]

kerplunk said:

Diderot said:

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

His point was to ignore the hiatus

Ah you mean that second, more recent, hiatus?

Ah pause V2.0 - good luck with that

Would you care for a wager? Howabout the 2020s will be warmer than the 2010s?

I was more interested in your ‘at some point’ point.

Of course they will be warmer, they’ll be warmest evah, since er, Medieval and Roman times. We’re clearly doomed. Cue blue flashing lights, sirens and declarations of climate emergency from Mucus et al, and Earthst Prizes will be awarded for the terminally gullible.

Do remind the 25k odd who’ll be descending on Glasgow next month that there’s a climate emergency. Hypocrisy writ large, but something must be done to save the planet from those nasty humans.

[kerplunk]

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

Diderot said:

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

His point was to ignore the hiatus

Ah you mean that second, more recent, hiatus?

Ah pause V2.0 - good luck with that

Would you care for a wager? Howabout the 2020s will be warmer than the 2010s?

I was more interested in your ‘at some point’ point.

Of course they will be warmer, they’ll be warmest evah, since er, Medieval and Roman times. We’re clearly doomed. Cue blue flashing lights, sirens and declarations of climate emergency from Mucus et al, and Earthst Prizes will be awarded for the terminally gullible.

Do remind the 25k odd who’ll be descending on Glasgow next month that there’s a climate emergency. Hypocrisy writ large, but something must be done to save the planet from those nasty humans.

Not much confidence in Pause V2.0 then. I don't blame you - tis a sucker's game

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 19th October 00:34

[Diderot]

kerplunk said:

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

Diderot said:

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Sounds very much like this little arsetickle from Shukman that I linked to on 13th October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-588...

Tag line is this little gem. (Not lettuce): ‘The Environment Agency says hundreds could die in a flooding event at some point'.

Sorry what was your point KP?

His point was to ignore the hiatus

Ah you mean that second, more recent, hiatus?

Ah pause V2.0 - good luck with that

Would you care for a wager? Howabout the 2020s will be warmer than the 2010s?

I was more interested in your ‘at some point’ point.

Of course they will be warmer, they’ll be warmest evah, since er, Medieval and Roman times. We’re clearly doomed. Cue blue flashing lights, sirens and declarations of climate emergency from Mucus et al, and Earthst Prizes will be awarded for the terminally gullible.

Do remind the 25k odd who’ll be descending on Glasgow next month that there’s a climate emergency. Hypocrisy writ large, but something must be done to save the planet from those nasty humans.

Not much confidence in Pause V2.0 then. I don't blame you - tis a sucker's game

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 19th October 00:34

Indeed, it’s all politics at the end of the day, and ‘twas ever thus.

[PRTVR]

kerplunk said:

PRTVR said:

So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.

'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction

Maybe not but you can have it for free, compared to the billions spent by climate scientists that are regularly wrong.

[PRTVR]

kerplunk said:

Ah pause V2.0 - good luck with that

Would you care for a wager? Howabout the 2020s will be warmer than the 2010s?

My guess is it will be warmer, given that the data is in the hands of people who want it to be warmer .
The problem will be if we experience a cold winter with record energy costs peoples beliefs in the warming will be challenged, people are already talking about eat or heat, do you think people who are shivering will be thinking we need to stop the warming ?

[johnboy1975]

Tlandcruiser said:

I assume for the government to implement the 2035 gas boiler ban, an impact assessment would have been carried out? If so is it possible to view it anywhere?

Sky are running a piece on someone's whose installed a heat pump plus installation of cladding and other insulation, citing a big reduction in energy bills. (No link, sorry, just on the rolling news)

There was some talk of the Scottish scheme which left people with higher bills some pages ago. (*)

So.....is it cheaper to go electric for heating, or not? (or only if you tax the fk out of gas and apply large subsidies to electric?)

Is the 5k grant available to everyone, how much is the total cost, and are there any savings to be had long term?

(*) Here's part of the discussion, on page 480

johnboy1975 said:

.:ian:. said:

robinessex said:

The eco boilers that cost families £5K a year

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-...

On a cold Wednesday evening, the rain is pelting at the windows of the Slamannan Community Centre, where around 50 people have braved the weather to attend a meeting about soaring energy bills.
They are residents of this and other rural villages near Falkirk, in Scotland, where households have seen their bills jump to more than £100 a week — about £5,000 a year — in a matter of months.
Some families have been forced to use food banks so they can afford to heat their homes.
The problems stem from a decision by Falkirk Council to install new, eco-friendly boilers in around 900 council properties over the past ten years, in a project costing £6 million.

Any comments from the Green Blob party about this ?

Imagine heating your whole house with a large immersion heater. In sunny Scotland! Joined up thinking there!

Article is 2 years old. They were complaining about 16p per kwh - I wonder what they are paying now? Or did they rip them out and replace with gas?

Edited by johnboy1975 on Tuesday 19th October 07:33

[turbobloke]

johnboy1975 said:

Tlandcruiser said:

I assume for the government to implement the 2035 gas boiler ban, an impact assessment would have been carried out? If so is it possible to view it anywhere?

Sky are running a piece on someone's whose installed a heat pump plus installation of cladding and other insulation, citing a big reduction in energy bills. (No link, sorry, just on the rolling news)

There was some talk of the Scottish scheme which left people with higher bills some pages ago. (*)

So.....is it cheaper to go electric for heating, or not? (or only if you tax the fk out of gas and apply large subsidies to electric?)

Is the 5k grant available to everyone, how much is the total cost, and are there any savings to be had long term?

(*) Here's part of the discussion, on page 480

johnboy1975 said:

.:ian:. said:

robinessex said:

The eco boilers that cost families £5K a year

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-...

On a cold Wednesday evening, the rain is pelting at the windows of the Slamannan Community Centre, where around 50 people have braved the weather to attend a meeting about soaring energy bills.
They are residents of this and other rural villages near Falkirk, in Scotland, where households have seen their bills jump to more than £100 a week — about £5,000 a year — in a matter of months.
Some families have been forced to use food banks so they can afford to heat their homes.
The problems stem from a decision by Falkirk Council to install new, eco-friendly boilers in around 900 council properties over the past ten years, in a project costing £6 million.

Any comments from the Green Blob party about this ?

Imagine heating your whole house with a large immersion heater. In sunny Scotland! Joined up thinking there!

Article is 2 years old. They were complaining about 16p per kwh - I wonder what they are paying now? Or did they rip them out and replace with gas?

Thank Gaia for the Renewable Heat Incentive! Apart from having the word 'renewable' in its name, pinning it with the angels as well as the DBEIS, everybody paying tax pays towards the cost of other people's heating as well as their own! Win win, what a result.

[dickymint]

Couple of weeks ago…..

[youtube] https://youtu.be/yBIZVOggxLI [/youtube]

Now….


“the Greenshirts of the Boiler Police are not going to kick in your door with their sandal-clad feet and seize, at carrot-point, your trusty old combi.”

[kerplunk]

PRTVR said:

My guess is it will be warmer, given that the data is in the hands of people who want it to be warmer .

My guess is it will be warmer in the UAH data too which can't be alleged is 'in the hands of people who want it to be warmer'. Willing to put my money where my mouth is too. Up for it? Every decade has been warmer than the previous in the UAH data so far, but what goes up must come down at some point right? You could win one back for the cycle-ists who've lost bets based on the 2010s recently

[robinessex]

Heat pump grants worth £5,000 to help replace gas boilers

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/post.asp?h=0&a...

That should fix the plant. Job done.

[turbobloke]

robinessex said:

Heat pump grants worth £5,000 to help replace gas boilers

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/post.asp?h=0&a...

That should fix the plant. Job done.

Praise be to Gaia, we're saved, thanks to politicians (again).